Skip to main content

SJM 8006

In Committee

Senate

Limited license legal tech.

Concerning the limited license legal technician program.

This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.

How does a bill become law?
  1. Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
  2. Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
  3. Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
  4. Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
  5. Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
  6. Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
Introduced: January 12, 2025
Last Action: March 12, 2026
Status: S Rules 3

AI Analysis

This analysis was generated by AI and may contain errors. It is not legal advice. Always refer to the official bill text for authoritative information.
People & CommunitiesPeople-leaningCorporate & Wealthy Interests

This bill asks the Washington State Supreme Court to bring back and expand the limited license legal technician program, which was paused in 2020. The goal is to help address the shortage of lawyers—especially for low- and moderate-income people—by allowing trained non-lawyers to give limited legal help in areas like housing, debt, and administrative hearings.

  • Ask the Washington State Supreme Court to reverse its 2020 decision to end (sunset) the limited license legal technician program and start issuing new licenses again.
  • Request that the Supreme Court expand the program within one year to allow limited license legal technicians to help clients at administrative hearings (e.g., benefits, housing, labor issues) and provide eviction and debt assistance.
  • Direct the Supreme Court to create a work group to study how limited license legal technicians could assist people facing criminal charges in courts of limited jurisdiction (e.g., district courts), and require the group to submit recommendations within two years.
  • Cite prior success of the program (2014–2020), including independent studies showing improved access to justice and national recognition as a model for other states.

Who is affected

  • Low- and moderate-income Washington residentsLow- and moderate-income residents who struggle to afford or access legal help, especially in civil matters like housing (evictions), debt collection, and administrative benefits hearings.
  • Courts of limited jurisdictionCourts of limited jurisdiction (e.g., district and municipal courts) that handle many civil and criminal cases but often lack sufficient legal staff to support fair and efficient proceedings.
  • Aspiring and current limited license legal techniciansIndividuals with legal training (but not full attorneys) who meet specific education and experience requirements and seek to provide limited legal services under supervision.
  • State administrative agenciesState agencies that run administrative hearings (e.g., Department of Social and Health Services, Department of Labor & Industries), which often involve complex rules and impact vulnerable populations.
Fiscal impact: Potential short-term costs for the Washington State Supreme Court to reinstate and expand the program (e.g., staffing, training oversight), but long-term savings expected through reduced court backlogs, fewer evictions, and improved access to benefits—reducing emergency and crisis-related public spending.
Model: Intel/Qwen3-Coder-Next-int4-AutoRoundGenerated: Mar 19, 2026 at 9:56 PM

Pro/Con Analysis

Stronger case for benefits

Potential Benefits (5)
  • Low- and moderate-income residents facing eviction or debt collection will gain access to affordable, trained legal help—reducing unnecessary court appearances, preventing homelessness, and stabilizing households; the 2017 Public Welfare Foundation study cited in the bill found measurable improvements in access to justice.

    HousingPeopleRef: Section 3(1) — Reinstatement of licensing; Section 3(2) — Expansion to administrative, eviction, and debt assistance
  • Vulnerable populations navigating complex administrative hearings (e.g., SNAP, TANF, disability appeals, wage theft claims) will receive trained, supervised assistance—reducing errors, increasing benefit access, and preventing wrongful deprivations of essential services.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Section 3(2) — Expansion to administrative hearings (e.g., benefits, labor, housing)
  • Courts of limited jurisdiction (e.g., district courts) handle most low-level criminal cases but face severe attorney shortages; trained technicians could help unrepresented defendants understand procedures, complete forms, and prepare for hearings—reducing unnecessary jail time and improving procedural fairness.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Section 3(3) — Work group on criminal assistance in courts of limited jurisdiction
  • By reducing evictions and streamlining administrative hearings, the program can decrease court caseloads, lower emergency shelter and social service costs, and reduce state expenditures on crisis response—generating net savings over time.

    Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Fiscal Impact section — “long-term savings expected through reduced court backlogs, fewer evictions, and improved access to benefits”
  • Aspiring legal professionals—especially those from underrepresented or lower-income backgrounds—gain a viable, lower-cost pathway into the legal field, increasing diversity and workforce capacity without requiring a full law degree.

    Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Section 3(1) — Reinstatement of licensing; Summary — “aspiring and current limited license legal technicians”
Potential Concerns (3)
  • Expanding non-lawyer legal assistance in eviction and debt matters may increase the risk of inadequate legal representation in high-stakes civil proceedings, especially if technicians lack full legal training or oversight; however, the bill explicitly requires supervision and sets training standards, mitigating but not eliminating this concern.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Section 3(2) — Expansion to include eviction and debt assistance; Section 3(1) — Reinstatement of licensing
  • Allowing limited license legal technicians to assist in criminal matters—even in limited jurisdiction courts—raises due process concerns, as criminal defendants have a constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment; the bill does not propose full representation but only “assistance,” which may blur ethical boundaries and create confusion about the scope of practice.

    Public SafetyLean peopleRef: Section 3(3) — Work group to study criminal representation in courts of limited jurisdiction
  • Reinstating and expanding the program will require initial investment by the Supreme Court in staffing, training oversight, and administrative infrastructure, which could strain court resources in the short term before savings materialize.

    Local GovernmentLean peopleRef: Fiscal Impact section — “Potential short-term costs for the Washington State Supreme Court”

Who Is Most Affected

Low- and moderate-income Washington residentsPositive Impact

Low- and moderate-income residents—especially those facing eviction, debt collection, or benefit denials—will benefit significantly from increased access to affordable legal help, reducing financial instability and housing insecurity.

Courts of limited jurisdictionMixed Impact

Courts of limited jurisdiction will benefit from reduced caseloads and improved case management, but must also ensure proper supervision and ethical boundaries to avoid due process violations.

Aspiring and current limited license legal techniciansPositive Impact

Aspiring and current limited license legal technicians—often paralegals, social workers, or community advocates—gain formal recognition and expanded scope, increasing career opportunities and community impact.

State administrative agenciesMixed Impact

State administrative agencies (e.g., DSHS, L&I) will see more informed and prepared clients, potentially reducing procedural delays—but may face increased demand for hearings as more people pursue benefits claims.

Sponsors

Senator Torres(Republican)District 15Primary
Senator Hasegawa(Democrat)District 11Secondary